United States v. Wilson, 3148.

• Decision Date: 17 June 1931
• Docket Number: No. 3148.,3148.
• Citation: 50 F.2d 1063
• Parties: UNITED STATES v. WILSON.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

50 F.2d 1063 (1931)

UNITED STATES v. WILSON.

No. 3148.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

June 17, 1931.

C. L. Dawson, Atty., U. S. Veterans' Bureau, of Washington, D. C., and Joseph A. Tolbert, U. S. Atty., of Greenville, S. C. (William Wolff Smith, Gen. Counsel, U. S. Veterans' Bureau, of Washington, D. C., on the brief), for the United States.

Douglas Featherstone and Calhoun A. Mays, both of Greenwood, S. C. (Mays & Featherstone, of Greenwood, S. C., on the brief), for appellee.

Before PARKER, NORTHCOTT, and SOPER, Circuit Judges.

NORTHCOTT, Circuit Judge.

Appellee, James W. Wilson, hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff, instituted this action in the District Court of the United States for the Western District of South Carolina, on a $10,000 war risk insurance contract. Plaintiff enlisted in the army of the United States on June 24, 1918, and was honorably discharged on June 24, 1919, and while serving in the army was issued a war risk insurance policy for $10,000. The last date the insurance contract was in force was July 31, 1919. Plaintiff alleged that while in such service he suffered serious and permanent injury to his leg, and injury to his nervous system through being under shell fire, from the effect of which disabilities he became permanently and totally disabled to the extent contemplated by the said contract of war risk insurance, as of June 24, 1919.

Two weeks after his discharge from the army, plaintiff went to work at the same occupation he had followed before entering the army, working in textile mills, and worked practically continuously, up to the time of the trial, a period of eleven years, receiving about the same wages as others working with him at the same tasks. The case was tried in November, 1930, before a jury. Motion was made to direct a verdict in behalf of the United States, which motion was denied by the court, and the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff. Judgment was entered on the verdict by the court below, from which action this appeal was taken.

Two main questions are raised by the appellant in its assignments of error: First, that the court erred in admitting certain reports of physical examinations made of the plaintiff, which were contained in the files of the United States Veterans' Bureau; second, that the court erred in not directing a verdict for the defendant.

The reports in question, to the admission of which objection was made, were reports of physicians to the Veterans' Bureau, and contained, among other things, certain statements of plaintiff himself, made during the examination. In United States of America v. Wescoat, 49 F.(2d) 193, decided by this court, April 13, 1931, Judge Parker exhaustively discusses the question of the admission of evidence of this character, and this court held that the evidence in that case was admissible, because it...